February 2020 Reading Thread

[Randy M.]

What about listening to someone read to you — someone actually present? That would be different from listening to a recording.

Unfortunately, no rewind for distracted listeners.

Tangentially, years ago I was in a training session on how to make presentations. Of the information unloaded on us one chart was generational, showing how the generations before the Baby Boomers were good, attentive listeners, partly because families had more conversations then, partly because of radio. Baby boomers were more visual, acquiring information in 30-60 second bites. Gen X was more computer-oriented and the media they liked had sped up, so visual, but in briefer bursts.

Seems to me the current generation, or some portion of it, is headed back toward those from the Greatest Generation, listening becoming a more acute skill than in their parents and grandparents.

I still prefer reading to listening, my own voice making the inflections, but I admit I enjoy a really good radio play.

Randy M.

 

[tobl]

i was following the discussion with interest.
for me it cames down to a few things.
i always read a lot and still read when i do have the time. but for the last 5 or 6 years i hear mostly audiobooks with some ebooks for goos mesure. frankly i've a bigger problem with ebooks than with audiobooks. unless you read it on a pc screen or on your smartphone, you have to have an ebook reader. well for me if i'm going to have something in my hands i prefer a book. also, since i use mainly public transportation, like trains and metro it's sometimes difficult to find space to read, specially if you're not seated. with an auiobook you can follow the story no matter what. another advantage for me is that you can have a library with you in your smartphone, so if you don't like some new book, and i'm frequentaly finding new writers, you can just pass to another. besides some books are produced in a way like a radio drama, or as they say, a movie in your mind. and i think is brilliant. just one last opinion: i'm not blind, thank God, but i don't think there are many books in braille. maybe i'm mistaken. so what better way for blind people to explore new worlds?

 

[Danny McG]

. so what better way for blind people to explore new worlds

 

[Parson]

I would agree that listening to audio books is different. But I would never say worse. When I'm listening to a thriller I found that I cannot listen while driving. I found myself missing corners and wondering where I was, which warned me that I might be missing more important things! But to listen to a thriller is much more engrossing to me than reading one. Part of that is because if I'm reading the better the book the faster I read, and I don't savior it as much. If I am listening it can only go at one pace. You might be surprised to know, but there have been a few series that I've read where after listening to several books, I came to one not available in audio format and reading was much less enjoyable.

Other items:
-- The reader makes a HUGH difference. --- There are some books who sell a lot more copies because they have a "star" reader.
-- If you are not driving! you can easily go make to hear something again. You can always move backwards by 30 sec. bits. And if you are listening to an ebook you can move backwards (with a Kindle) by pages as well.

@dannymcg posted while I was writing and I seem to have followed his lead!

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I'm currently on a minor K. J. Parker binge. I've just read novellas "Prosper's Demon" and "The Pen is Mightier," and am now dithering between rereading Academic Exercises (a collection I greatly enjoyed a few years ago) or buying and reading newer collection The Father of Lies first.

 

[elvet]

I'm currently on a minor K. J. Parker binge. I've just read novellas "Prosper's Demon" and "The Pen is Mightier," and am now dithering between rereading Academic Exercises (a collection I greatly enjoyed a few years ago) or buying and reading newer collection The Father of Lies first.

One of my favourite authors. I'd like to get Academic Exercises, but the book is currently ~$200 CDN on Amazon (used). $700 new

 

[Parson]

Just checked Amazon US --- Hard covers begin at $98.43 for "Used Acceptable" up to $169.95 for "Collectible, Like New." So some better, even given the exchange rate.

BUT

only $6.99 for a Kindle edition.

 

[elvet]

Just checked Amazon US --- Hard covers begin at $98.43 for "Used Acceptable" up to $169.95 for "Collectible, Like New." So some better, even given the exchange rate.

BUT

only $6.99 for a Kindle edition.

I don’t own a kindle, and dislike reading E-books. But if I get desperate enough.......

 

[Parson]

Could always read it on your computer or your phone.

 

[elvet]

Phone, what phone?

 

[Parson]

The Smart phone the SFF techies like you are supposed to have. --- I take it you are of the luddite clan.

 

[elvet]

The Smart phone the SFF techies like you are supposed to have. --- I take it you are of the luddite clan.

I have one, only turn it on for emergencies.

 

[Parson]

Like reading a book you want to read for less than a hundred dollars?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

One thing that converted me to ebooks (the other was that I could change the font size and so avoid much eye strain) was discovering how many of the books I wanted, but could only find in old, collectible editions costing hundreds of dollars, were readily available in digital editions for five or six dollars.

 

[Galactic Bus Driver]

Galactic, I could imagine myself thinking that some book was better than it really is because I enjoyed hearing someone such as John Gielgud read it. Conversely, I could imagine myself unfairly thinking a book tedious because of the voice qualities of the reader.

Those are both valid concerns. Anyone who has ever suffered through a bad Library of Congress reading could attest to that. Larry Niven's "Footfall" is a prime example. Even though it's rather long, I can breeze through reading it in print. The copy I got on tape from a library sale... Ugh! It's absolutely unlistenable (if that's a word). On the other hand, a good reader can make a good book better and even make a borderline DNF title readable. There are certainly pros and cons and I'm not looking to convince anyone that audio books are right for them. Only that they're right for the people who are listening to them and it's a viable method of "reading" a book. In the end, as long as you enjoy it, well, isn't that the point?

 

[Galactic Bus Driver]

I find that an interesting debate.
I myself don't really listen to audiobooks at all. I don't have the time for it, but I also don't make time for it.
For me, it's a different activity, more similar to TV maybe. It doesn't do the same thing for me, maybe it's about the temporality of things. It can be an immersive experience in its own right, but something about being fixed to a voice and a timeline... I can't re-read a sentence because I liked it, or didn't understand it, I can't revel in a certain wording, read faster or slower, lift my head and look around, look back down. Reading means to me I can't do anything else, I have to make that space and time to read.
Ok ok, maybe I'm conservative, but if I'm really honest I probably feel deep inside that reading is superior.
My husband listens to a lot of podcasts and audiobooks etc, and he learns a lot (which he also remembers) and is exposed to many different genres like this. But I always feel like he doesn't REALLY listen, or make the time - or it feels too much like consumption for me. But probably because I'm a backwards purist... ;-P

I'm going to respond to your post, even though you're not the only one who voiced concerns over tempo and being able to go back to listen to something you really liked or didn't understand. Today's audio book apps are not equatable to yesterdays books on tape and books on CD. They have variable playback speeds, without sacrificing pitch (my personal favorite allowing selection from 0.5x to 3.0x in 0.1 increments), short jump backward and forward, long jump backward and forward, next file, previous file and the like. I've never had a problem of missing some bit of dialog that I can't quickly jump back to or going back to "re-read" something profound. That being said, not all players are equal and some are certainly better than others.

Of course, if you must dedicate yourself to reading to the exclusion of all else (I have to do that as well when I'm reading print) then it probably won't work for you. IN all honesty, audio books were an acquired taste for me. I tried a couple and didn't really like it, but was getting horribly bored with the same music over and over, and the horrible advertising campaigns, especially in election years. So I tried them again. I found that I liked some and not others and eventually wound up where I am today. I simply wouldn't knwo what to do with myself during any boring chore without them.

Nothing wrong with being a purist. I gave up Star Wars because of what Disney's done to it.

 

[Extollager]

Galactic, you’ll have seen why I wouldn’t say I had read a book that I’d listened to. Either experience might be very good, but they’re not the same experience, not equivalent.

When I was a teacher, I’d occasionally be aware that a student wasn’t doing the reading himself or herself, but that someone in the Learning Services domain was reading it to him/her, or the student was listening to recordings. Nobody over there asked me what I thought about that, and of course I can’t monitor what students do outside of class and wouldn’t want to. But I had the students write their short essays in class. (This was doable since my literature courses usually met in the evening and we had 2.5-hour sessions.)

 

[Galactic Bus Driver]

-- If you are not driving! you can easily go make to hear something again.

My Kia connects wirelessly to my Kindle Fire (my dedicated audio book device) and has forward and back controls on the touch screen.

 

[Galactic Bus Driver]

Galactic, you’ll have seen why I wouldn’t say I had read a book that I’d listened to. Either experience might be very good, but they’re not the same experience, not equivalent.

When I was a teacher, I’d occasionally be aware that a student wasn’t doing the reading himself or herself, but that someone in the Learning Services domain was reading it to him/her, or the student was listening to recordings. Nobody over there asked me what I thought about that, and of course I can’t monitor what students do outside of class and wouldn’t want to. But I had the students write their short essays in class. (This was doable since my literature courses usually met in the evening and we had 2.5-hour sessions.)

I don't think I've argued that they're equivalent, in fact quite the opposite. I think they're both valid, if very different, ways of doing the same thing. Much like watching television with captions turned on.

Perhaps I should claim to have "experienced" 58 books so far this year?

 

[Extollager]

Galactic, sorry if it sounded like I was saying you said the two types of experiences were equivalent. But some people do seem to see the matter that way, and it might be good if they were encouraged to reflect on the habit.

My guess is that as I get (even) older, I will turn to recorded books more -- if I can find good recordings of the ones I want.

Incidentally I read most, at least, of The Silmarillion onto cassettes when it came out (for a blind friend). Over the years, I must have read several dozen books to my wife -- lots of short stories and novels. Do we have any folks here who have done a lot of reading aloud to one or more other adults, or who have been read to as adults? As I've become older, my throat seems to get dry faster than when I was 30 or so, and, no, that's not said as an excuse for reaching for the beer mug!